Re: Representing key sequences (was: master 859190f 2/3: Convert some keymaps to defvar-keymap)

[Stefan Kangas]

Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> writes:
>
> Currently, we have 2 "builtin/native" representation of key sequences:
>
> (A) strings (where every char represents an event)
> (B) vectors of events
>
> I believe they are both unpopular, but (A) really sucks (it only
> handles a small subset of possible key-sequences).
>
> There are two "standard" alternatives:
> (C) string (passed to `kbd`).
> (D) vectors of lists (using the XEmacs syntax).
>
> I'd be in favor of promoting both (C) and (D) while phasing out both (A)
> and (B).

I agree with regards to A and C, but I was not aware of the difference
between B and D.  Could you show an example of the difference between
B and D, and explain how the latter is more preferable?  Also, in
which situations can we currently use B but not D?